Hmmm... about right but I'd probably switch McVeigh and Hussein
Heights confirmed or mostly confirmed - very close to accurate...
PG Stalin 5'6"
SG Hitler 5'7"
SF McVeigh 6'0"
PF Hussein 6'2"
C Bin Laden 6'5"
Coach: Manson 5'4" (although he listed his height as 5'7" on Cal Drivers Lic)
Heights confirmed or mostly confirmed - very close to accurate... PG Stalin 5'6"
SG Hitler 5'7"
SF McVeigh 6'0"
PF Hussein 6'2"
C Bin Laden 6'5"
Coach: Manson 5'4" (although he listed his height as 5'7" on Cal Drivers Lic)
I would've put McVeigh at the 3, but his interior defense is the bomb.
While I certainly did pose a few what ifs, it's not speculation to say that MJ and Kobe were coach killers when their coach wasn't PJ. It's not speculation to say that when given the opportunity to install a coach of their choosing they (MJ in this case) didn't just go and get a yes man (Collins). LeBron has been comparable but to be fair to his coaches they did not have championship level talent being squandered. As for what's in the papers/Yahoo/Espn onlines, it is sourced, if not always by name so I'm not just pulling it out of my butt that there were apparent problems with Ferry and LeBron's team over LeBron's non-basketball interests. And it isn't really speculation to say that LeBron has his hands in way more than just the basketball cookie drawer because we know he's done some guest acting stints, runs his own brand, etc... I just think that there's a fair chance that the team he goes to may get more than they've bargained for. I think that is a legit concern and not just random speculation. Wherever he goes if he doesn't stay in Cleveland there is going to be far more pressure and scrutiny to win right away and if it doesn't happen there is going to be finger pointing galore. And if the two superstars fail to co-exist than what? Is the coach going to constantly be in the hotseat?
Honestly I hope LeBron fulfills his legacy, I just have questions and I'm happy we've got our own thing going that we haven't got all our eggs in the LeBron basket.
Honestly I hope LeBron fulfills his legacy, I just have questions and I'm happy we've got our own thing going that we haven't got all our eggs in the LeBron basket.
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea that GM's would throw money at free-agents, without the intent of making their team a contender.
Petrie: Well that's a very attractive deal, Mr. James, and we can afford it. We're very flattered that Sacramento is your first choice. We just can't do it, though. People will think we're trying to buy a championship. No, no,...we really don't want to have that image with people. No hard feelings and good luck
Petrie: Well that's a very attractive deal, Mr. James, and we can afford it. We're very flattered that Sacramento is your first choice. We just can't do it, though. People will think we're trying to buy a championship. No, no,...we really don't want to have that image with people. No hard feelings and good luck
K
i'm going to have to concede to you, because the statistics will be on your side and i'm not great with the numbers (being a part of my argument, which is why i footnote things by saying it's my opinion).
it's just that, i look at a team like the cavs, who've been juggernauts in the past two regular seasons, and i think to myself, how do these guys lose in the playoffs? in the regular season it's all laughter and good time and fake-camera-posing, and then in the playoffs it's like it's a whole different team. and it's even odder because, like you say, the evidence points to lebron getting statistically better in the postseason, and yet somehow they lose. is it the supporting players all of a sudden sucking? does lebron become more dominant at the detriment of the team? does his leadership for some reason waver? i just don't know, but i must attribute some of it to lebron.
okay, who am i kidding, i attribute a lot of it to him, i plain don't like him!
it's just that, i look at a team like the cavs, who've been juggernauts in the past two regular seasons, and i think to myself, how do these guys lose in the playoffs? in the regular season it's all laughter and good time and fake-camera-posing, and then in the playoffs it's like it's a whole different team. and it's even odder because, like you say, the evidence points to lebron getting statistically better in the postseason, and yet somehow they lose. is it the supporting players all of a sudden sucking? does lebron become more dominant at the detriment of the team? does his leadership for some reason waver? i just don't know, but i must attribute some of it to lebron.
okay, who am i kidding, i attribute a lot of it to him, i plain don't like him!
Again, IDK how much basketball outside the Kings you really watch, but if you watch a good amount it doesn't seem as if you are paying good enough attention to notice these things. But they are there.
Best post ever.
And as for those of you complaining about LeBron's personality...who cares? Some of the current Kings might be d-bags (hell Cousins by many accounts is a Rasheed Wallace in the making). Who are we to judge these players without even knowing them personally? A basketball team should care about only one thing when choosing free agents - how well they play basketball. And there is no doubt LeBron does that well.
Any fan stupid enough to not want LeBron or another player of his caliber based on superficial reasons like his personality or him not being a home-grown talent (guess you must not have rooted for Vlade, Doug, Bibby, or Webb either) better not complain if this team does not get substantially better in the next few years and either Reke ends up leaving or the team moves out of Sacramento.
And as for those of you complaining about LeBron's personality...who cares? Some of the current Kings might be d-bags (hell Cousins by many accounts is a Rasheed Wallace in the making). Who are we to judge these players without even knowing them personally? A basketball team should care about only one thing when choosing free agents - how well they play basketball. And there is no doubt LeBron does that well.
Any fan stupid enough to not want LeBron or another player of his caliber based on superficial reasons like his personality or him not being a home-grown talent (guess you must not have rooted for Vlade, Doug, Bibby, or Webb either) better not complain if this team does not get substantially better in the next few years and either Reke ends up leaving or the team moves out of Sacramento.
Fair enough and I apologize. That being said, my point remains the same. There has never been a team with entirely home-grown talent who won a championship. And if you start looking at personalities or other superficial personalities when making basketball decisions (however absurd this particular scenario might be), then you are shooting your own team in the foot.
As an aside my favorite basketball team ever (early 2000s Kings) had a questionable personality (C-Webb) and plenty of players who came from other teams. That didn't diminish my enjoyment of that team at all, although I can't speak for how you viewed it.
As an aside my favorite basketball team ever (early 2000s Kings) had a questionable personality (C-Webb) and plenty of players who came from other teams. That didn't diminish my enjoyment of that team at all, although I can't speak for how you viewed it.
Last edited:
Not sure how true this is. Brian Windhorst of Cleveland Plain Dealer (probably the best writer on all things Lebron and one of the best beat writers period) and Chris Broussard of ESPN.com have both written on numerous occasions that Lebron has no desire to choose a coach or a GM, and in fact prefers a situation with a set coach/GM to one with neither one set. Why do you think the Cavs are rushing to hire a coach before the start of free agency on Thursday? Not to mention that just about all of the teams that are commonly mentioned as possible destinations for Lebron have coaches and GMs in place. Most of that earlier talk about Lebron wanting to choose a coach/GM increasingly appear to have just been wild speculation.
I flat out do not like Lebron. It hard for me to want a player i consider a pompous crybaby... and on top of it all he gets away with it. From a basketball point of view he would be a great, no denying it. From a personal point of view I would have a hard time rooting for that. I also dislike Lebron because of the special treatment he gets on the court and he still complains on every play, just like Kobe. It makes me sick that they get away with the stuff that they do when Tyreke does almost nothing and gets ejected.
Mabye the early 2000's Lakers made me feel this way but its just the way I feel. Lebron reminds me of Kobe and I would never in a million years want Kobe or Shaq on my team.
Mabye the early 2000's Lakers made me feel this way but its just the way I feel. Lebron reminds me of Kobe and I would never in a million years want Kobe or Shaq on my team.
Last edited:
Except for the Cavs they all have coaches in place but none are what I'd call stable. The Heat are probably the best situation, but that's only if Riley comes down and takes over. Do you believe any of the coaches besides Riley could stand up to James if he doesn't buy into the system? Chicago has the best core of surrounding talent and appear to have signed a decent coach except that he's a career assistant who has never head coached a game in the NBA. Thibodeau is rumored to have been chosen by LeBron's people, whether that is because LeBron wants him or because they share "people" I have no honest clue. I do think coaching is going to be key to this superteam whichever city it finds itself in.
If the Kings had the opportunity to get Lebron I'd take it. I wouldn't necessarily be too happy about it, because well I'm now a large Tyreke fan. Seeing him become second fiddle (and in fact I think his offensive effectiveness would be very limited next to a Lebron James type of player) isn't something I look forward to. Needless to say, I'd be happy about the winning ... but if you can win on "homegrown talent" it certainly beats winning through free agency. But winning through free agency beats not winning. Anyway I don't think Lebron would consider coming to Sacramento. If he did he'd probably have Petrie and Paul Westphal and Tyreke Evans, Garcia, Donte, Omri, Cousins, Beno, Whiteside, Brockman, JT and Landry fired within 2 seasons because they're a poor supporting cast and blablabla.
The reason why I think James is a d-bag is because of some of the stuff he has done. Like not shaking the other players' hands when the Cavs lost. Then he gives his whole "I didn't win, there's nothing to be happy about speech"... IMO if you're one of the biggest sports icons in the world the VERY least you could do is show a little sportsmanship. Kids are looking up to you as a role model, and there you are being the worst sportsman you could possibly be. What does that show? And him being young has no place in an argument to justify his actions whatsoever. If you want to claim to be one of the best to ever play the game, you better act like you're mature enough to handle the pressure. Then there's the not talking to the media and things like that ... it's just poor sportsmanship in my opinion. Something which I think every sportsman should have.
But if you told me that signing LBJ would bring my favourite team a championship (though I don't think I'd support the Kings anymore if they traded away the whole team for a couple of big time superstars, since it's not like a local team for me or anything), then by all means sign him and win. Doesn't mean I'll put up with any more shows of lousy behaviour though.
The reason why I think James is a d-bag is because of some of the stuff he has done. Like not shaking the other players' hands when the Cavs lost. Then he gives his whole "I didn't win, there's nothing to be happy about speech"... IMO if you're one of the biggest sports icons in the world the VERY least you could do is show a little sportsmanship. Kids are looking up to you as a role model, and there you are being the worst sportsman you could possibly be. What does that show? And him being young has no place in an argument to justify his actions whatsoever. If you want to claim to be one of the best to ever play the game, you better act like you're mature enough to handle the pressure. Then there's the not talking to the media and things like that ... it's just poor sportsmanship in my opinion. Something which I think every sportsman should have.
But if you told me that signing LBJ would bring my favourite team a championship (though I don't think I'd support the Kings anymore if they traded away the whole team for a couple of big time superstars, since it's not like a local team for me or anything), then by all means sign him and win. Doesn't mean I'll put up with any more shows of lousy behaviour though.
Oddly that incident actually raised my opinion of LeBron considerably, because I've been there. I know exactly what he was feeling. I never quite did what he did there, but I was a notoriously poor loser when I was young and just about half a step from shaking hands with one hand, and knocking you on your *** with the other after a loss. And woe be to anyone who ever made the mistake of being a poor winner (that is the one that has always bothered me -- the taunters). It was the wrong thing to do, but I completely understood it, and better yet, it showed me just how hot the competitive fire burned in him. In a league where you routinely run into guys who are just stealing money and don't really care, that incident, immature as it was, was reassuring.
Yup well I'm certainly not questioning his ability to play or his drive to succeed/improve. You weren't a professional athlete with millions around the world looking up to you (or were you? ), it's a whole different ball game. It's like how if you post something on twitter dissing Andrew Bynum no one would care. My beef with Lebron isn't bout him being a bad basketball player, it's about him being a less than exemplary person.
Like I said, when it's all said and done you only care about the basketball part with regards to bringing your team a championship. I'd still take him if it meant we would have a high chance at winning it all. But he wouldn't be one of the guys that I'd really admire and be a big fan of.
), it's a whole different ball game. It's like how if you post something on twitter dissing Andrew Bynum no one would care. My beef with Lebron isn't bout him being a bad basketball player, it's about him being a less than exemplary person.Like I said, when it's all said and done you only care about the basketball part with regards to bringing your team a championship. I'd still take him if it meant we would have a high chance at winning it all. But he wouldn't be one of the guys that I'd really admire and be a big fan of.
I agree with you 100%. I guess I grew up in a different time. I wasn't about to shake hands with some jerk that had been talking trash the entire game. And you know what, he didn't want to shake hands with me either. All I wanted to do was beat his sorry Butt. Back then a sportsman was someone that went fishing. This will probably sound like sacrilege, but when I played in little league (yes I was young once) only the best players played. There was none of this, we have to get everyone on the team a chance to bat crap. I practiced from dawn to bouncing tennis balls off steps under street lights at night. I worked hard to become as good as I could possibly be. So I wasn't going to feel sorry for little tubby Johnny if he didn't get into the game, when he didn't put in the work to get better. If someone slid into second base with his spikes up, you could expect a fight to break out.
I know this flies in the face of everything were taught today. Now its all about being fair. Everyone getting his chance, whether he deserves it or not. I couldn't believe when I went to one of my grandson's basketball games and they didn't keep score. I mean whats the frigging point of the damm game then? Everyone is suspossed to get an equal chance. You know what? Were not all equal. Some of us are better than others at certain things. And that should be applauded, not diminished. The reason I'm saying all this, is because its this current mentality that leads people to be critical. Its the current concept of sportsmanship. I'm sorry, but if you just whipped my butt, your the last person on earth I want to shake hands with right afterwards. Because I'm already thinking about how I'm going to return the favor. Now if I run into you in the parking lot, I'll buy you a beer, or a coke if your too young. But right after I just laid all my emotions out on the floor, or on the field, I'm in no mood to make nice with the opposition just so the fans can feel good. And thats even more so if its for the whole ball of wax.
Now some of you will certainly disagree with me, and thats fine. I understand. I don't care, but I understand. You see, I don't think sports were ever intended to be fair. They were intended to be fun, and to be a reflection of life. In life you have sucesses and failures. Usually more failures than sucess. And sports are great for teaching young people how to cope with failure and hopefully, with hard work, turn those failures into sucess. But you can't accomplish that if you change the rules for some people who can't compete at the same level. Or if you don't keep score, so no one fails or suceeds, and hopefully no one gets their feelings hurt. So yeah, I'm a poor loser. And I want everyone on my team to be a poor loser. To quote Vince Lombardi once more. " Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser"
I know this flies in the face of everything were taught today. Now its all about being fair. Everyone getting his chance, whether he deserves it or not. I couldn't believe when I went to one of my grandson's basketball games and they didn't keep score. I mean whats the frigging point of the damm game then? Everyone is suspossed to get an equal chance. You know what? Were not all equal. Some of us are better than others at certain things. And that should be applauded, not diminished. The reason I'm saying all this, is because its this current mentality that leads people to be critical. Its the current concept of sportsmanship. I'm sorry, but if you just whipped my butt, your the last person on earth I want to shake hands with right afterwards. Because I'm already thinking about how I'm going to return the favor. Now if I run into you in the parking lot, I'll buy you a beer, or a coke if your too young. But right after I just laid all my emotions out on the floor, or on the field, I'm in no mood to make nice with the opposition just so the fans can feel good. And thats even more so if its for the whole ball of wax.
Now some of you will certainly disagree with me, and thats fine. I understand. I don't care, but I understand. You see, I don't think sports were ever intended to be fair. They were intended to be fun, and to be a reflection of life. In life you have sucesses and failures. Usually more failures than sucess. And sports are great for teaching young people how to cope with failure and hopefully, with hard work, turn those failures into sucess. But you can't accomplish that if you change the rules for some people who can't compete at the same level. Or if you don't keep score, so no one fails or suceeds, and hopefully no one gets their feelings hurt. So yeah, I'm a poor loser. And I want everyone on my team to be a poor loser. To quote Vince Lombardi once more. " Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser"
I'm not really sure why you brought up the whole concept of giving guys an equal chance, not keeping score and stuff like that. If it's just something new you're bringing up then fine, but I just want to make sure that you know that wasn't what I was referring to.
You're right, absolutely right about how life isn't fair and some people are better in certain things. I'm 19, and I fully agree with you about this. There's no such thing as being the best in everything you do. I'd argue that everyone should be at least given a shot, for example being able to at least try out. There could be a couple of guys in China and Africa who are really really talented basketball players but for whatever reason life doesn't throw them the opportunity to show off their skills. Now that sucks, and I'm certainly against that. But as far as say, playing time goes, definitely you should have to work to get it (with reference to your baseball story).
Personally, I don't think that you need to hate whoever beat you. I don't think that is the only way of showing passion and determination and competitiveness. I honestly don't see how shaking your opponents' hand after they've beaten you means that you are any less competitive or any less passionate. It's simply courtesy. Courtesy doesn't make sense all the time, hell why do I have to be friendly to the cashier who greets me? It's that sorta thing IMO. The way I see it, you recognise that the guy who just beat is either more talented/more lucky/practised harder than you did, and you congratulate him for that. Shake the guy's hand, then go and work your *** off to make sure that next time round he's the congratulating you for your efforts.
Perhaps you wish for a world where everyone is cold, ruthless, selfish. That may lead to greater productivity, but I certainly wouldn't want to live in such a world. Being the public figure that LBJ is, it's bull**** to give losing as your excuse for not shaking a guy's hand. Other champions have done it. Michael Jordan did it, does that mean that Michael Jordan is not competitive, not fiery enough?
Anyway, it could just be the generation gap between us. I'd rather he just shake the guy's hand out of respect for the game, and not have any controversy about it. Is that so hard?
You're right, absolutely right about how life isn't fair and some people are better in certain things. I'm 19, and I fully agree with you about this. There's no such thing as being the best in everything you do. I'd argue that everyone should be at least given a shot, for example being able to at least try out. There could be a couple of guys in China and Africa who are really really talented basketball players but for whatever reason life doesn't throw them the opportunity to show off their skills. Now that sucks, and I'm certainly against that. But as far as say, playing time goes, definitely you should have to work to get it (with reference to your baseball story).
Personally, I don't think that you need to hate whoever beat you. I don't think that is the only way of showing passion and determination and competitiveness. I honestly don't see how shaking your opponents' hand after they've beaten you means that you are any less competitive or any less passionate. It's simply courtesy. Courtesy doesn't make sense all the time, hell why do I have to be friendly to the cashier who greets me? It's that sorta thing IMO. The way I see it, you recognise that the guy who just beat is either more talented/more lucky/practised harder than you did, and you congratulate him for that. Shake the guy's hand, then go and work your *** off to make sure that next time round he's the congratulating you for your efforts.
Perhaps you wish for a world where everyone is cold, ruthless, selfish. That may lead to greater productivity, but I certainly wouldn't want to live in such a world. Being the public figure that LBJ is, it's bull**** to give losing as your excuse for not shaking a guy's hand. Other champions have done it. Michael Jordan did it, does that mean that Michael Jordan is not competitive, not fiery enough?
Anyway, it could just be the generation gap between us. I'd rather he just shake the guy's hand out of respect for the game, and not have any controversy about it. Is that so hard?
I wasn't referring to what a player did or did not do. If a player chooses to shake hands with someone, then thats his decision. Ditto the opposite decision. I was referring to the people that place their own judgements on those decisions and where that mentality came from. When I was young, if Babe Ruth had refused to shake hands with a player on the other team, no one would have even given it a second thought. Today, every move, action, word, how you dress, is on display to the public and judgement is passed. I find it amusing that people make judgements on these players without knowing whats going on in that persons mind at that precise moment. How well do you really know your best friend. Can you really tell me whats going on your wife, or girlfriends mind. How well do you really know anyone in an intimate way. And by intimate, I'm not talking about sex.
See its one thing to say you disagree with a players actions on the court if he decides to not shake hands with the opposition. Its quite another to say you hate that player because of it. And I'm not saying thats how you feel. But there have been some that have implied that. I've always been confused by people that will throw out every good thing a person may have done because of one action they might not agree with. I'm not in desire of a cold cruel world thats ruthless and selfish. And if thats what you got from my rant, then I apologize. But I'am in favor of a world based in reality and not idealism. As someone once said, "Reality isn't an option". We do young men a disservice when we teach them that every thing in life is fair and equal. And I think its that inviorment that creates the mentality of the judgement being passed.
So I'm not going to pass judgement on LeBron James the man, even if I were to pass judgement on his actions post game. I don't know the man. And neither do you. I have a hard enough time trying to figure out my wife's thinking, let alone the thinking process of someone I haven't even met. So if you want to condemm his actions, have at it. But thats an entirely different issue from condemming him as a person. Of course you can do what you want. Its still a free country and you opinon carries just as much weight as mine. I have a little motto that I try to remember and live by. It was given to me by my great aunt that eventually raised me. She said " You love a person in spite of himself, and not because of himself." By the way, I'm a much nicer person now than I was back then. But one thing I've learned in life is to be true to yourself. Don't do things because other people want you to. Don't be a hypocrite, and make nice with someone you don't like because it looks good to everyone else.
I really don't think were that far apart on this issue. I just think we see it from different prespectives. You've been taught to be a good sport, and I understand that. I was taught the same thing, except being a good sport back then was a little different. And it wasn't insulting to the opposition because they felt the same way. We took losing hard. And the last thing I wanted to see after losing a game was the smiling face of the guy that had just beat me. Didn't mean I didn't like him or respect him. I just wanted my space at that moment. And he gave it to me, and I him if the situation was reversed. Not so today. We pretend were happy for the other guy when we just lost the grand prize. Somehow that just doesn't ring true to me. Somehow that not the reality of the situation. But it looks good on TV, because its all about perception and image. For us!
See its one thing to say you disagree with a players actions on the court if he decides to not shake hands with the opposition. Its quite another to say you hate that player because of it. And I'm not saying thats how you feel. But there have been some that have implied that. I've always been confused by people that will throw out every good thing a person may have done because of one action they might not agree with. I'm not in desire of a cold cruel world thats ruthless and selfish. And if thats what you got from my rant, then I apologize. But I'am in favor of a world based in reality and not idealism. As someone once said, "Reality isn't an option". We do young men a disservice when we teach them that every thing in life is fair and equal. And I think its that inviorment that creates the mentality of the judgement being passed.
So I'm not going to pass judgement on LeBron James the man, even if I were to pass judgement on his actions post game. I don't know the man. And neither do you. I have a hard enough time trying to figure out my wife's thinking, let alone the thinking process of someone I haven't even met. So if you want to condemm his actions, have at it. But thats an entirely different issue from condemming him as a person. Of course you can do what you want. Its still a free country and you opinon carries just as much weight as mine. I have a little motto that I try to remember and live by. It was given to me by my great aunt that eventually raised me. She said " You love a person in spite of himself, and not because of himself." By the way, I'm a much nicer person now than I was back then. But one thing I've learned in life is to be true to yourself. Don't do things because other people want you to. Don't be a hypocrite, and make nice with someone you don't like because it looks good to everyone else.
I really don't think were that far apart on this issue. I just think we see it from different prespectives. You've been taught to be a good sport, and I understand that. I was taught the same thing, except being a good sport back then was a little different. And it wasn't insulting to the opposition because they felt the same way. We took losing hard. And the last thing I wanted to see after losing a game was the smiling face of the guy that had just beat me. Didn't mean I didn't like him or respect him. I just wanted my space at that moment. And he gave it to me, and I him if the situation was reversed. Not so today. We pretend were happy for the other guy when we just lost the grand prize. Somehow that just doesn't ring true to me. Somehow that not the reality of the situation. But it looks good on TV, because its all about perception and image. For us!
Maybe because I come from a hockey background with the end of series handshake but I never equated leaving every thing you had on the court/field/rink etc. with not being able to shake someone's hand when it was all finished no matter what you may have done or wanted to do to the other guy in the game.
I think shaking hands has just become customary, so people expect it now, and when it doesn't happen for whatever reason, we act like there's something wrong with it. LeBron said he congratulated the other team in his own way, privately, and it was probably way more meaningful one-on-one then it would have been in the heat of the moment.
Peyton Manning didn't shake Drew Brees' hand after the Super Bowl. Reporters asked him why, and he said it was basically because things happened so fast at the end of the game, and he was still coming to grips with the fact that the game was over. Then you have the podium being set up and the presentations getting ready to happen, and the winning team is hugging each other and all that stuff, and it's just kind of an awkward scene for the losers. He said he recognized that back in '06 when they won, that there's not a lot of sympathy for the losing team, and he said that he shared some meaningful moments with Drew Brees and Sean Payton after the game privately.
Might not agree with that, but it's not just being a poor sport. Sometimes it's just being upset that you lost, and you don't want to shake anyone's hand. But what means more? An obligatory handshake right after the game, or a phone call later on showing respect and giving some commendation for your opponent as they move on, or congratulating them for winning the whole thing? I could see it being a big deal if this was a regular season game in February or something, because that would just be petty. But this was LeBron's team being put out of the playoffs. Worst loss of the season. Again. I don't blame him for not shaking hands. And even if I did, it's just such a little thing overall, that it doesn't even matter.
Peyton Manning didn't shake Drew Brees' hand after the Super Bowl. Reporters asked him why, and he said it was basically because things happened so fast at the end of the game, and he was still coming to grips with the fact that the game was over. Then you have the podium being set up and the presentations getting ready to happen, and the winning team is hugging each other and all that stuff, and it's just kind of an awkward scene for the losers. He said he recognized that back in '06 when they won, that there's not a lot of sympathy for the losing team, and he said that he shared some meaningful moments with Drew Brees and Sean Payton after the game privately.
Might not agree with that, but it's not just being a poor sport. Sometimes it's just being upset that you lost, and you don't want to shake anyone's hand. But what means more? An obligatory handshake right after the game, or a phone call later on showing respect and giving some commendation for your opponent as they move on, or congratulating them for winning the whole thing? I could see it being a big deal if this was a regular season game in February or something, because that would just be petty. But this was LeBron's team being put out of the playoffs. Worst loss of the season. Again. I don't blame him for not shaking hands. And even if I did, it's just such a little thing overall, that it doesn't even matter.
